The 3 Idiots of Kashmir

It has been long since this blog saw a new post and this sudden want to write, even though there have been unpardonable crimes against the people of Kashmir in the last few months, comes from one single desire: to speak when sense seems to simply slip away, and no one appears to be obvious to it.

It was on twitter that news of a brawl between the ruling NC and PDP came to light, that of a poster of the popular Indian film, the 3 Idiots, being spoofed to represent the three generations of Abdullah clan. One can not be joyous for seeing the traitors of Kashmir being made fun of in this way, for the singular reason that it included one person, one leader, who had fought many a battles for Kashmir. That one person is seen as evil by many, for the singular reason of not knowing that person. For being oblivious to his struggles for Kashmir. He is painted a traitor by every tom, dick and harry of Kashmir, just because they know nothing about him. No one will point a finger towards Omar Farooq, the self imposed Mirwaiz , even though his father fought elections for the Janta Dal – an Indian party, for the simple reason that we do not dare question and our perceptions are what we live by every day. Perceptions, not realities.

That one person, who should not have been made fun of, in this manner, is none other than the person, who brought education to the state of Kashmir, who did away with the Zamindari system (it was an effect of Moulana Abdul Kalam’s vision but that vision needed an executor and unlike Punjab, no man in Kashmir owns land enough to house three railway stations) and who spent 22 long years behind the bars of that very state, put there by one of his friends and then his daughter. That man is Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah – a lion or not for Kashmir that one can not comment upon, but a leader in the true sense of the word, without doubt.

It needs more than a blog post to write about this man and I need to refer to my notes, which I do not have access to right now, but the wikipedia article on this man is not a flawed read.

Without an ounce of doubt, they needed to divert the attention of us, the fickle minded Kashmiris, and they have. And they needed to divert attention from something very terrible, they would not want anyone to think about:

These are the official oppression figures. Instead of defending their Healing Touch or speaking against these figures, they chose to fall very low and worked the 3 Idiots poster.

And this does not mean, in any manner, that the Abdullahs are not guilty of crimes. Farooq and Omar are without a doubt, but Sheikh Abdullah, a lot less than all the politicians combined who have willfully destroyed Kashmir. Be it the separatists or the mainstream politicians.

Sheikh Abdullah spent 22 years behind Indian bars, a lot more than the combined jail time of many of our present day ‘famous’ leaders perhaps.

We need to see events in the light of past and present, by being joyous over stupidities of another devil, will only push us further towards misery.

You seem to be an ardent admirer of Sheikh Abdullah. But let me clear few misconceptions here.

Sheikh did not abolish Zamindari as you have put it for upholding the vision of Maulana Azad but he abolished it for upholding his socialist ideology. Sheikh was a communist to the core. He tried to implement Lenin’s ideology in letter and spirit in Kashmir. Lal Chowk (Red Square), Red flag of NC, renaming of MC to NC, Land to the tiller are pointing towards it. So called Accession of Kashmir with India was more for the sake of Socialism than anything else. If you dont agree with me then please go through various speeches of Sheikh in the constiuent assembly of Kashmir. You will get your answers.

Dilemma: The Socialism for which Sheikh tied Kashmir with India, is no where present now. India is figthing with socialists now (Moaists, Naxals etc). Sheikh must be turning in his grave.

Ardent admirer or not, I do hold him higher than the present day separatists or for that matter the hypocrites that abound around us.

Was Sheikh for a socialist Kashmir? Even Josef Korbel in his book put forth arguments to this claim, but those were a consequence of the then general distrust of Russia or the fear that he might align with Russia (this fear persisted to the extent that Sheikh had to meet the then Presidential candidate of US Adlai Stevenson to put them at bay).

Lal Chowk, I would perhaps agree was named after Red Square, but the change in name MC to NC was a consequence of wanting to give representation to other religions and not socialism. Even Moulvi Masoodi had then supported and wanted this change. Naya Kashmir could again be claimed to be a pointer towards Socialism.

Can these events alone, or combined with his calls for equality, prosperity and justice, be called as his desire for Socialism?

Having read Sheikh Abdullah I do not believe so, a lot of his antics were a part of his popularity politics and that is what he was: a politician!

In one of the speeches (sermons) at Hazratbal on the eve of Shab e Meraj, Sheikh conveyed that Gandhi too had gone through some sort of a Meraj. After this many of his educated and ardent followers, shunned him. The masses who were generally innocent, illeterate and ignorant barely understood his intentions. He tried to create a prophetic love for Indian leaders in Kashmiri masses. He was an arrogant despot. His only greatness and mercy on the people of Kashmir was that he did not claim Prophethood. Had he done so, many innocent and ignorant Kashmiris would have followed him like sheep. Allah be merciful to him.
Treatment given by him to Sofi Akbar is an evidence for those who admire him.

He participated in Panchayati elections when Kashmiris were giving sacrifices for his Plebicite Front.

His blunders are big and deliberate to be forgotten. He is father of all misfortunes and every innocent killing at the hands of Indians has an indirect connection with him. May Allah relieve him of all the burdens.

If you had told me these words a decade and a half back – I would have nodded my head in disgust at this man. Not today, today I have learned to understand each person and situations in a wider context than, if I may be allowed to say, propaganda sentences.

I think, we can both agree to disagree.

Let me ask you: how much of the burden of the present misery of Kashmiris do you put on Moulvi Farooq, the Mirwaiz, Yasin Malik Geelani and Muftis? I will let the lones out of this question, because I would want to believe that we agree they are scum.

Well if you think I am engaged in propoganda against Sheikh Abdullah, his sons and grandsons and last but not least against Indian nation, then I am sorry for hurting your sensibilities. But I cannot change my point of view for this man and the older I grow, wiser I become and more is my disgust for him.

Other leaders, I cannot answer for them. They too have some share of responsibilities on them but one thing is clear Sheikh Abdullah is a traitor and others are just victims of circumstances. Sheikh Abdullah got my land gifted to occupiers, others have no role in that. So for me Sheikh is the only villain.

No, I did not say that you are involved in that. I was pointing to a trend, we all saw, in the early 90’s (just a decade since Sheikh Abdullah’s death was mourned by hundreds of thousands)of calling Sheikh a traitor, for no reason but just because the guys in guns asked to.

Did Sheikh Abdullah gift to land to India? I would disagree. A look at the events then, and looking at Alaister Lamb’s account, one can safely arrive at the conclusion that India had plans to occupy Kashmir – much before – with or without Abdullah. The forces landed in Kashmir even before Maharaja signed the treaty, if at all he did.

Abdullah did not gift the land because he was in no such position. Abdullah opposing it would do nothing either – India had to take Kashmir and it would, as it did Junagad and Hyderabad (a stronger state than Kashmir). If Abdullah had been in a such a position of strength to oppose India’s forces, I would agree – but he was not.

Abdullah mobilised forces against the tribals, who were busy looting and raping in Baramullah, but that did not effect them, as much as the fact that they spent three days in Baramullah – for their vices. And it was Moulvi Masoodi’s brother(?) who helped the Indian Forces through the forests.

He tried, more often than not, to gain a status of a Free Nation for Kashmir and he failed, as have others since then. He gave, to an extent, a presentable face to India, but that was it. It did not stop the UN resolutions from passing. It did not help India the way they had hoped, for if it had, he would not have seen the inside of India’s prisons. And if he was that much a traitor, Pakistan would not cancel its independence day celebrations when he was arrested – an endorsement even Geelani has been unable to obtain from Pakistan.

I see, since when this forum has begin to favour Sheikh dynasty. Ask any layman like sula, gula and mahmod in kashmir about Sheikh’s contibution they will immediately point their fingers towards Indian army occupying Kashmir, that is his sole and bigger contribution.

Fact of the matter is that every Kashmiri has been told to believe that every toilet, foot bridge and the choked gutter spilling over the roads is favour of the ministers, whileas as an elected representative they are bound to perform their duties towards the community.

This post as not to be construed as being in support of Sheikh Dynasty, if you look at some other posts you would understand that. This is just about realities as they happened. About truth. You are right that every person would point his finger towards him, but why? On what basis? Because JKLF told us so? Because it was just the trend then? When we stop analysing and thinking of issues on their merit we reach the stage we have today. Sheikh was evil because he just was and Geelani is good because he just it. Though, history, if at all we evolve as a nation that studies its past, without emotion, will judge Sheikh and Geelani in lights different, than we know of today.

No way above table of how many have been killed in NC or PDP regime in collobration with Delhi regime can be justified. Dog bite is a dog bite whether one bite or ten bites either by white dog or black dog, victim needs medical help and vaccination.

Alas! every dead body in the city of deads are scoring points on each death. Killers, murderers and rapists are fighting over the numbers of crimes committed. In the eyes of law, whether you kil one or the ten you committed a murder a crime.

I dont know what make you think of bringing a death calender here than their performance of past decades. It would be kind of you if you had drawn light on how many lives they saved.

God says in the Quran “if you kill one person unjustly as if you killed the whole humanity, and if you saved once person as if you saved the whole humanity”

The image is not supposed to justify any killing or an indicator of performance, far from it, it is strange you would think that way. But, we need to see everything objectively, which we do not. We have to understand that everyone contributes to these deaths, the civil society included, without the will to work or fight out the injustices.

Lives are saved by the Creator alone, we humans are good for killing alone.

The Pakistanis, however, reacted angrily at Abdullah’s dismissal (Baskhi was sworn in on 9th August 1953), despite their earlier criticism of the Sheikh’s pro-India stance. Karachi went on strike and the government of Pakistan announced the cancellation of their AUgust independence day celebrations.

In one of the speeches (sermons) at Hazratbal on the eve of Shab e Meraj, Sheikh conveyed that Gandhi too had gone through some sort of a Meraj. After this many of his educated and ardent followers, shunned him.

Thanx for citing the source ~K~ but now I wonder what prompted Sheikh Abdullah to favor India even after getting such a huge endorsement from Pakistan ??? Why did he make that Accord with Indira Gandhi??
I am just in search of truth, nobody should be demonized for no reason or for no fault of theirs…PEACE

Search of truth should take you further than asking people to cite sources. I won’t answer your question, but rather pose a few, so that you are able to see you are not seeking any truth, but just pretending to do so. You just want to make your point, of Sheikh endorsing India, but truth isn’s black and white.

Try to find answers to these questions in your quest for truth:

When did Sheikh Abdullah favor India?
When did Pakistan endorse him?
When, why and how many times was he jailed?
When was the accord made?
What did he say about the accord?

~K~ I ask for sources because thats a protocol I dont believe in anything blindly & a suggestion to you dont be “Judgmental” about people i am not offended for you ve called me technically a hypocrite(pretending to be sumthing which one is not)..

I am not for endorsing anyone’s side, I am for truth & justice be it in anyone’s favor or against anybody that is not my concern..Peace

Its good to ask for sources, but with what intent? Did you check the source? Did you check whether or not I made up the source? You definitely did not check the source (that I am sure of), and you never intend to; because asking a source was not a part of your ‘protocol’ but simply your non-acceptance of a fact. There never is a better way to try to trash a fact than ask for a source.

Judgemental about whom? Being judgemental is passing a sentence, giving punishment. Telling what you think about people, isn’t. Yes, if I were in a court, I would have passed capital punishment for Omar and Farooq – how’s that about listening to your ‘suggestion?’

I haven’t yet called you a hypocrite ‘technically,’ because I am not judgemental about you – a person I do not know of, and I wouldn’t also take the moral high ground and dole out unasked for suggestions.

And, what is it that is hypocritical of your comment? Let me eloborate: you asked ‘what prompted Sheikh Abdullah to favor India even after getting such a huge endorsement from Pakistan ???’ with three question marks nevertheless.

Let me answer you, since you do not have the answers to any of the questions I asked.

He never endorsed India the way you think he did. In 1947, yes he did, but events following that saw him behind bars for 22 years! Any idea why? Pakistan endorsed him in 1958 – that’s 11 years after independence. Do you want to know what the situation in 1958 was? Or does your search of truth include only trying to trash what people say and doesn’t suit you?

How about answering my questions, to take this search for truth further? You don’t expect me to do the work for your search of truth, do you? You are not for truth or justice, that I can tell.

Too rash ~K~ i m checking the sources thats why i havent wrote anything back yet…
What i am up for only God knows & I know…as you rightly said “you dont know me” & yet you are being sure that i am not for truth & justice-> Your perception not my headache!!!
& if you go through my comments you ll see the I asked for the source from “The Kashmir Center” as well!!
Peace & Regards!!